Show your 6 PR Rounds (WW1 & WW2)

[Andysarmoury]

Thanks Dave, i was going to sell it but seeing all these has made me think again and will look for a projectile for it i do have a fired one but some one has filed the driving band smooth again so has buggered it up.
Cheers
Andy

 

[SG500]

Attached is a photo of Frizzens 6 pounder.
Dave.

 

[HarryG]

Hi Dave & Chris
Yes it is a blank, i have now listed the rounds.
Harry

My guess would be a blank Chris, lets see what Harry says though.
Dave.

 

[Chris 42 RQ]

Many thanks

An official Blank then !
Thank you Harry and SG500 for the input.

 

[HarryG]

Hi Chris
Yes here is a photo of the headstamp

An official Blank then !
Thank you Harry and SG500 for the input.

 

[RichardB]

I noticed that the 3rd round from left in Hazords first post shows a squeezbore round, aside from the fact the lower part of the projectile doesnt look like it'll "squeeze", did this round require a tapered barrel, or was an adapter, like the littlejohn adapters added to the barrel?....if so, I assume only the US 57mm as it had no muzzle break.?

Regarding the littlejohn rounds, does anyone have pictures of the 6PR littlejohn adapter attached to the gun?

Again, beautiful rounds guys, I think we all really appreciate you posting your collections.

cheers
Rich

 

[Chris 42 RQ]

Stamped BLANK

Hi Chris
Yes here is a photo of the headstamp

Well at least I will easily be able to identify one marked BLANK as it is a bit of a giveaway !
Are they common as I have never come across one before?

 

[SG500]

I noticed that the 3rd round from left in Hazords first post shows a squeezbore round, aside from the fact the lower part of the projectile doesnt look like it'll "squeeze", did this round require a tapered barrel, or was an adapter, like the littlejohn adapters added to the barrel?....if so, I assume only the US 57mm as it had no muzzle break.?

Regarding the littlejohn rounds, does anyone have pictures of the 6PR littlejohn adapter attached to the gun?

Again, beautiful rounds guys, I think we all really appreciate you posting your collections.

cheers
Rich

Rich it was fired with an adaptor. The documentation I've got on this mentions the T10 adapter, The projectile does squeeze including the rear section. They did loads of work on this in 1942, the problem being how much to squeeze the projectile, tests were done on 57/40, 57/44 and 57/50. One of the problems with the adapter was how quickly to squeeze the projectile - with some of the designs the rear skirt got ripped off because the rate of squeeze was too sudden.
Ref: National defence research committee report A-43 "Hyper velocity development guns and ammunition"
Dave.

 

[SG500]

More information on 57/40

Rich a bit more info on the 57/40.
Dave.

 

[HAZORD]

Dave,

Were the Jones and Lamson experiments done by the U.S., the UK, or both?

 

[Tony Williams]

I only have the common 7cwt and 8cwt stuff, apart from an experimental APFSDS projo (not intended for service but as a half-size trial piece for a 120mm round).

I'd really like to add a 6cwt and 10cwt to my collection sometime...

 

[SG500]

Dave,

Were the Jones and Lamson experiments done by the U.S., the UK, or both?

John the Jomes and Lamson experiments were US developments.
The UK developed the 6pr7cwt littlejohn.
I've attached a few photos of one that has been fired without using the squeeze adaptor. Unfortunately not in my collection, I'm still looking for one but its top of my list :tinysmile_cry_t2:
Look closely at the scale on the photo - its easy to mistake it for a 2 pounder one but is a LOT bigger.
Dave.

 

[StielGr]

My 2 6Pr 7cwt APDS projectiles

The first is stamped 12/44 and the second 1/45.

 

[SG500]

At last, I finally got one:smile: its a Jones and Lamson 57mm squeezebore projectile as mentioned earlier in the thread. Interesting to note the difference with Hazards one (different alloy tip but same profile).
Thanks to a great fellow collector and BOCN member who knows I like such things.

Dave.

 

[HAZORD]

Dave,

Congrats on the new bullet for your collection!

 

[SG500]

Thanks Hazord.

Nice shell EOD, is that the right fuze, I'm no expert on the old stuff but have only seen that fuze on the 10,12 and 15 pounders. I've got a WW1 6 pounder HE minus the fuze so now I know what to look for.

Dave.

 

[charley777]

Hello Harry G . . .would you please provide the length of the Blank Mk1 case that is in your Photo#2
Thanks very much. Just to go in my data list. Cheers!

 

[EOD]

Thanks Hazord.

Nice shell EOD, is that the right fuze, I'm no expert on the old stuff but have only seen that fuze on the 10,12 and 15 pounders. I've got a WW1 6 pounder HE minus the fuze so now I know what to look for.

Dave.

Dave, I noticed your posting only now.
Yes it seems to be original since it has a separate brass fuze well to accomodate the conical thread of this fuze. To me it seems that this was an emergency measure to overcome a fuze shortage.
I have seen this also on a 2.75" mountain gun shrapnel dated 1914 with a No65A fuze on.

 

[thehairbarebunch]

With regard to pzgr40's excellent post. Just to point out that the Ballistic Cap didn't increase the projectile speed per se but reduced the decredation of projectile velocity during its flight from muzzle to target by reducing drag.

 

[thehairbarebunch]

That'll be degradation. doh !